10 years. He can get parole in 10 years. Do you think that enough for crimes?
No. I don’t think a thousand years is enough. Five seconds, followed by oblivion certainly isn’t.
Tell me, do you think he will get parole? Ever?
For the umpteenth time, “can” is not the same as “will.”
Ah, but he wasn’t sentenced to ten years. He was sentenced to 100 years. Let me type it out a few times so you’ll see it:
100 years.
A hundred years.
One hundred years.
A century.
Longer than one normal lifespan.
As part of the plea agreement he made, in which he agreed to testify against others, a sentence of life without parole was taken off the table.
I’ve an interesting question for you: do you agree with the rule of law?
In other news, a murderer gets the maximum sentence: 16 years. Odd thing, she’s not even in the military. Blasted civilians, protecting their own like that!
If he testifies honestly and truthfully against his fellow criminals, and shows remorse, and during his time in prison shows rehabilitation, then sure.
I am, in general, against the felony accomplice laws anyway. The person (or people) who did the killing should get a harsher sentence than those who were there expecting only to commit a lesser crime. Certainly, send them to jail - they deserve it. But should they be capable of being rehabilitated in ten or thirty years, then just as certainly let them rejoin society.
No, but you are implying that I deserve hanging:
We’ve got a few bad apples, but we do our best to keep them out. Sometimes they do get through, and we have laws to prosecute them when they fuck up.
That being said, I’ll just pencil your name in the book of people to “Leave Behind”. When people need us military members to do something, I’ll say my prayers, but I’ll remember just to leave you out of 'em.
Tripler
Have a nice day, everyone else!
Hey we did that joke already. 
Actually thank you for providing a cite to prove our point. Maybe your detailed posts will convince **Strunk ** he might be overboard and unjustified in his specific complaint and more importantly with the use of his broad brush.
Jim
Has anyone considered the possible implications if this had been tried, not in Kentucky, but rather in Iraq? Something to mull over…
Also, I hear he’ll be free in ten years. Does that seem a little short to anyone else?
This surely inspires confidence in the US military tribunal system right across the globe in every nation except the US.
It would have been at least curteous to the Iraqi people for the military tribunal to have taken place in Iraq, in fact doing it elsewhere appears to many other people across the world as somewhat arrogant.
I know the mechanism does not exist, but it would have been better to run the trial under US military rules and sentencing carried out by an Iraqi trial judge.
Contrast the performance of this trial, to those proposed for the accused detainnees in Guantanamo.
Here, civilians are being accused of crimes without access to independant counsel etc etc etc, yet US citizens accused of similar things do get a judicial trial.
I really do not think, having seen a 10 to 100 year sentence handed down by US military ‘justice’ for such heinous offences, that the detainnees will expect anything approaching fair, especailly since the smell that comes from the way most of them were detained is overpowering.
Those in Guantanamo who are to be tried this way are perhaps the lucky ones, since there are those for whom no committal for trial proceedings have been taken, and are in effect imprisoned without formal accusation - how much hope of those people got of ever being released ?
Add to that the individuals that were subject to ‘rendition’, which we all now know is just institutionalised kidnap and torture(and their identities not publicly recorded, so they can be murdered with impunity), and the US military justice system has absolutely fuck all credibility.
Maybe he should have been tried in Iraq by the Iraqis 
Huh. The OP got banned.
That wouldn’t have happened in Iraq.
Why, would they have beheaded him? 
You took the words out of my mouth,I suspect that there are people out there who hate the military etc. who then go out to find things to justify their hatred ,rather then being initially outraged by the sicko actions of the few and then going on to transfer their hatred in a distinctly mentally unhealthy way to all of the armed forces.
That said I think the guilty men should have been handed over to the victims families for summary justice.
I must disagree. That’s why we have juries and stuff. We are, after all supposed to be the Good Guys and showing these folks What is Right.
Of course, I rather imagine that like many things, that is a difference on our cultures.
Seeing as how the OP has been banned, I’m going to close this thread. Feel free to continue the discussion in a new one.